Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 938 F.2d 1062 - Harris v. Champion

Harris v. Champion’s Empirical Analysis

938 F.2d 1062 · 1991

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
2
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

68 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably Harris v. Champion (1994), United States v. Moreno (2006)

68 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

690199120002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Anders v. California · Barker v. Wingo · Fay v. Noia · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted unless it appears that — ... (B)(1) there is an absence of available State corrective process; or (ii) circumstances exist that render such process ineffective to protect the rights of the applicant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. .. the most typical remedy is to order the defendant released from custody unless the state court hears the petitioner's appeal within a clearly-defined, relatively short period of time (such as 90 days).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'inordinate, excessive and inexcusable delay'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.